I think one of these boards would be better:
>>>/ck/>>>/sci/>>40597271 (OP)>"balanced" diet out dated pseudoscience>food pyramid constantly changing nonsenseI can believe these claims. Normies indoctrinated into diet culture act like eating a couple cookies is akin to using lead to sweeten your drinks. They constantly go on contradictory diets that usually don’t work out for them. I think dieting is mostly a placebo effect. While seeking weight loss is a relatively recent phenomenon the idea of dieting as a medical treatment goes back thousands of years, to the days of Hippocrates and the four humors. Given how they take a long time to take effect, there’s always new ones and ones tailored to the user, and if they don’t work you can always accuse the patient of cheating, dieting as a medical treatment is extremely susceptible to the placebo effect. This is anecdotal but due to autistic sensory issues I’ve always had an “unhealthy” diet and after 21 years I’m still alive and kicking. I think the constant pressure during elementary school and in early life at home to “eat healthier”, “make good food choices”, and not eat too many “bad” foods only hardened my heart and made eating a stressful, painful experience.
I think those charts you sometimes see at schools with red light/yellow light/green light foods should have an extra black category filled with stuff that’s actively harmful like lead paint chips to put things in perspective.
AFAIK the main thing we really know about “healthy” foods is that ultra-processed foods seem harmful, but we don’t actually know why.
>expensive because muh farmers muh laborIsn’t meat subsidized?
>"junk" food tastes better and satisfies macrosEvidence?
>filled with cancer causing pesticidesGetting mercury poisoning is a risk of excessive seafood consumption. Since livestock are fed crops, shouldn’t the pesticides have a risk of traveling up the food chain?
>>40597287>>40597297Ad hominem.